Southern Metropolis Daily – China Digital Times (CDT)http://chinadigitaltimes.net
Covering China from CyberspaceFri, 09 Dec 2016 02:50:14 +0000en-UShourly1https://wordpress.org/?v=4.6.135652790China Digital Timeshttp://chinadigitaltimes.net/wp-content/themes/cdt/images/feedlogo.pnghttp://chinadigitaltimes.net
“Unable to Bear the Party Surname,” Editor Resignshttp://chinadigitaltimes.net/2016/03/unable-bear-party-surname-yu-shaolei-resigns/
Mon, 28 Mar 2016 23:07:37 +0000http://chinadigitaltimes.net/?p=192659While China’s leaders have long seen the news media as the “throat and tongue” of the Party, Xi Jinping has overseen a steady increase in the state’s control of the media narrative. While on a tour of leading state media outlets in February, Xi Jinping stressed that the media “bears the Party surname,” and must “speak for the Party and its propositions and protect the Party’s authority and unity.”

“This spring, let’s make a clean break. I’m getting old; after bowing for so long, I can’t stand it anymore. I want to see if I can adopt a new posture. To the person responsible for monitoring my Weibo and notifying his superiors about what I should be made to delete: you can heave a sigh of relief. Sorry for the stress I’ve caused you these last few years, and I sincerely hope your career can take a new direction. And to those friends who care about me, I won’t even say goodbye, Southern Media Group.” [Chinese]

On the application for resignation section asking for his reason for leaving, Yu wrote, “Inability to bear your surname” (无法跟着你们姓).

Liu Yuxia, editor of the Southern Metropolis News in Guangzhou, across the border from Hong Kong, was fired for her “mishandling” of the paper’s front-page published on February 20.

[…] Liu was accused in the circular of showing “a serious lack of political sensitivity” that triggered a misunderstanding of public opinion after some people interpreted the front page “in a malicious way”.

The front page in question in the newspaper’s Shenzhen edition featured a bolded headline high up on the page that read “Media run by the party and the government is a propaganda base and must follow the surname [display complete loyalty] of the party” – a quote from a speech on news and public opinion that Xi gave during a forum last week.

Directly beneath the headline was a large photograph of the burial at sea of Yuan Geng, a prominent reformist figure, with a small headline, “The soul returns to the sea” in the picture’s top right corner.

If the last two Chinese characters on each line of the main headline are read in conjunction with the photo headline below, the text reads “Media following the surname of the party have their souls returned to the sea”. [Source]

“Malicious online interpretations by some people of serious mistakes by editors who have serious deficits in political sensitivity led to a serious guidance incident,” the notice read, using partyspeak for ideological error.

[…] Three journalists were punished, according to the notice. It said that Ren Tianyang, the editor in chief, had made an “in-depth apology”; his deputy, Wang Haijun, had received demerits; and Liu Yuxia, the front-page editor responsible, had been fired.

Contacted by telephone, Mr. Ren said he knew nothing about the episode. Mr. Wang said he had not seen the notice and declined to comment. Ms. Liu said she had seen the notice on WeChat, the mobile messaging platform, but had not been formally notified of any penalties.

Asked whether she had arranged those headlines deliberately to send a message, Ms. Liu said: “Of course not. I definitely had no such intention.” [Source]

For a digital image of the original Southern Metropolis Daily front page, see a post from David Bandurski at China Media Project.

]]>191985Journalist Reappears in China Under Police Detentionhttp://chinadigitaltimes.net/2016/02/190907/
Wed, 03 Feb 2016 20:45:21 +0000http://chinadigitaltimes.net/?p=190907Last month, former Southern Metropolis Daily columnist Li Xin went missing after traveling to Thailand, from where he planned to seek asylum in the U.S. Li had left China after revealing that he had been coerced into become a police informant to report on fellow journalists. Li’s wife, He Fangmei, says she received a phone call from Li, who said he is in China under police detention. AP reports:

Li fled China in October and told the AP in an interview from India that he left because he had been forced to spy on fellow journalists, and that he wanted to stop. He later sought shelter in Thailand before disappearing on Jan 11.

“He won’t tell me where he is in China, but asks me to stay rested and live my life. He asks me not to contact any outsider for it does no good to him or me,” the wife said in voice and text messages exchanged with AP from the Henan province town of Xinxiang. “But I know that’s the pattern, and Li completely spoke contrary to his own will.”

Local police reached by phone said they had no knowledge of the case. [Source]

Ms. He maintained that the phone call from her husband indicated that he had become the latest in a series of Chinese citizens or foreigners with Chinese ancestry who have been impelled while abroad to go to China to cooperate with secretive inquiries.

Critics have said that these people are victims of illicit renditions by increasingly bold Chinese security forces, and Ms. He said she believed that Mr. Li would have returned to China only under force or threats, despite his assertion that he came back freely.

“His tone was like they’d given him guidance,” Ms. He said. She said that her husband sounded calm, but that he had told her not to interrupt him with questions.

“I said to him, ‘Where are you? Just where are you? Tell me. At the very least, I have to find a lawyer for you,’ ” Ms. He said. “But the line was silent for a long time, and I knew someone at his side was telling him what to say, and he said, ‘Don’t get involved. Don’t ask so much. I’m doing fine.’ ” [Source]

Ren Tianyang, the executive editor of Southern Metropolis Daily, said by telephone that he did not know the reasons for Mr. Song’s departure.

[…] Chen Min [also known by the pen name Xiao Shu], a former editor at Southern Weekend, a sister newspaper of Southern Metropolis Daily, until he himself was dismissed in 2011 because of his criticism of the government, said that the firing of Mr. Song and recent instructions not to cooperate with foreign media outlets “reflect the authorities’ deep insecurity, their profound distrust of society as a whole and their growing concern that they are losing control of public opinion.”

[…] “They purge you from traditional media, then crack down on you on Weibo,” Mr. Chen said. “And then they see you can still have a voice in overseas media. So, how to control that? They cut down the journalists.” [Source]

What has changed […] is the perceived extent to which foreign presence is seen as harmful to domestic “information security.” After the Snowden revelations and the escalating tensions surrounding cybersecurity, the government has become increasingly concerned about domestic reliance on foreign telecommunications software and hardware, and has intensified efforts to develop indigenous technology. Shortly after Gao Yu was detained, Beijing reportedly ordered large, strategic state-owned enterprises to cut ties with foreign consultancy firms, apparently out of fear that these might engage in industrial espionage.

But perhaps most importantly, foreign reporting on China has vastly improved in quality and quantity in the past few years, and is reaching a quickly-growing domestic readership. Successive reports about the leadership’s wealth published by, amongst others, The New York Times and the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists, have further fuelled growing domestic disaffection, and challenged the credibility of official news outlets.

In response, the leadership now seems to be bent on erecting new barriers between domestic and international information environments: what happens in China, must stay in China. Conversely, what is outside may only enter under strict controls [….] [Source]

]]>175421Minitrue: Delete Story on Guangzhou Arsonisthttp://chinadigitaltimes.net/2014/07/minitrue-delete-story-guangzhou-arsonist/
Fri, 18 Jul 2014 18:42:31 +0000http://chinadigitaltimes.net/?p=175257The following censorship instruction, issued to the media by government authorities, has been leaked and distributed online. The name of the issuing body has been omitted to protect the source.

CDT collects directives from a variety of sources and checks them against official Chinese media reports to confirm their implementation.

Since directives are sometimes communicated orally to journalists and editors, who then leak them online, the wording published here may not be exact. The date given may indicate when the directive was leaked, rather than when it was issued. CDT does its utmost to verify dates and wording, but also takes precautions to protect the source.

Even though it is laughed at as a joke, I have noticed that the Global Times is mentioned in more and more of my friends’ articles. This is like embedding a commercial for the Global Times in the text of a column. In the liberal-leaning discussion of media transformation, it will be picked out as an example to explain how the system is so barbaric, indicative how much deeper it has intruded and how ubiquitous it has become.

On just about all of China’s hot stories, the Global Times is not afraid to display its crude opinions: Chen Guangcheng, the Southern Weekend incident, Pu Zhiqiang, Hong Kong’s “Occupy Central,” Taiwan’s Sunflower Student Movement – the list is long. It never uses complicated arguments and does not care about logic, and some of its sentences don’t even make grammatical sense. Its points are easy to pick apart, but this in no way implies that it is easy to defeat.

[…] The evil is not overcome but overtaken. The most practical way to deal with it is to not talk about it. After writing this column, I will not mention it again. It’s like a virus thriving in a particular political eco-system, if we cannot stop it, we must then quarantine it. If we cannot quarantine the crowd, we can at least quarantine ourselves. That way, we will not become its carriers and unintended promulgators. [Source]

In recent years, more and more Chinese Net users are forced to seek alternatives to surf the Internet outside of the Great Firewall (GFW), China’s Internet infrastructure, by using mirror websites that show blocked Google search results, or by using VPNs.

[…] Along with the growth of VPN services, GreatFire.org has also been boosting its services relating to mirrored sites. The organization has set up more mirror sites to make blocked content available to all Chinese without the need of a VPN. On Twitter, it has attracted over 13,000 followers and its Freeweibo account, which shows banned Weibo posts, has 23,000 followers, most of whom are Chinese.

[…] “We ask our users to fight against the GFW by reposting mirror sites, censored content or complaining to the government directly,” said Alpha, who believes that the fight against the firewall has been heating up. [Source]

Sales reportedly came to a standstill in the city after the Beijing Times alleged that the water standard used by the company was inferior to Soviet standards in a series of articles that spanned over a month between April and May.

[…] Nongfu’s counter-attack comes half a year after the reports began, but just one day after a national meeting between senior editors and state regulators at the All-China Journalists Association in Beijing. Di Huisheng, the association’s Communist Party secretary, announced measures taken by the central government to curb “targeted news extortion”, namely incriminating reports on companies by journalists who were tipped off and, allegedly, handsomely rewarded by competitors.

[…] “Some journalists don’t understand that they should pass on positive energy to realise the ‘Chinese Dream’,” Di said, referring to a recent party slogan. He added that journalists violating this principle would face administrative and legal repercussions. [Source]

What is known so far: police in Changsha last Tuesday night confirmed Chen Yongzhou, a reporter with the Guangzhou-based daily New Express, was detained on October 18 for writing a series of stories “smearing the reputation” of Zoomlion, which is based in Changsha . The company had blamed Chen’s multipart series for a drop in its shares listed in Hong Kong and Shenzhen.

The New Express fought back. It ran front-page editorials on consecutive days urging police to release Chen. It also asserted that after checking 15 stories with Chen’s byline, they believed his reports were accurate except for one figure wrongly used.

[…] A shocking development came when China Central Television [CCTV], one of the government’s most powerful mouthpieces, aired an interview with Chen who – handcuffed and wearing a green prison uniform – confessed he had been paid by “others” to write more than a dozen negative stories about Zoomlion. It was a bombshell, even though CCTV did not give any details about who the “others” were. [Source]

The Guardian’s David Hearst wrote that “Chen’s fate divided his Chinese colleagues in Nanjing who participated in a week-long exchange programme with foreign journalists […]. Some believed what Chen had originally written and concluded he had been thrown to the wolves. The majority, however, thought his confession was genuine and that he had accepted bribes by a rival firm to write stories that would benefit it commercially.” Media critic Hu Yong wrote at Caixin that “not only was [the confession] a slap in the face for all those who rallied to support him, but Chen and New Express suddenly went from being victims to loathed figures across China. In fact, outraged Chinese have used a particularly insulting term for Chen: ‘jize,’ or prostitute.”

[… T]he apparent revelations in the second phase of the Chen Yongzhou case — a television “confession” and rumors of high-level support from officials in Beijing — put many people in a tight spot. So this journalist we so vocally supported is in fact corrupt?

The All-China Journalists Association (ACJA), which at first showed rare solidarity with the reporter, quickly changed its tune, issuing a condemnation of the reporter’s conduct. The New Express could only capitulate and proclaim its guilt, its management suffering the consequences.

So much remains unclear, hidden by the smog. But we can say for certain that the credibility of China’s news media has plunged to a new low with this case. Media consumers must now think to themselves: if money is at work behind everything we read, where is the information we can trust? [Source]

CCTV’s reporting of the story was rightly criticized for being less than fair, and the manner of Chen’s arrest and the investigation and prosecution of the case also raised questions of collusion. Some valid concerns include the questionable conduct of the Hunan police officers, who arrived in a Zoomlion car to arrest Chen; the apparent neglect of the reporter’s right to legal counsel; the vagueness of the charges of “damaging (a company’s) commercial reputation” that have been slapped on Chen, which made them open to abuse; the fact that Chen is so far the only person to be prosecuted even though the case clearly involved his employer.

The murky chain of relations that led to the arrest must be thoroughly probed.

At its heart, however, the allegation exposes the dark side of Chinese journalism. That someone should abuse his journalist’s right to report should pain all of us who work in the industry. However, worse harm is being done to the credibility of the media, which in every society plays a major role in that society’s development. The onus is on media professionals to exercise discipline and keep our conduct honest. [Source]

Hu’s take-no-prisoners approach has apparently angered some of her media industry colleagues. They have since published various commentary articles and blogs in retort, blaming her for missing the “bigger picture” of the industry’s struggle with increasing censorship, especially in a time when newspapers, amid an onslaught from new media, have seen a dive in profits following a national economic slowdown. Some went further, accusing Hu of currying favour with the Communist Party and siding with the “evil forces” of government censors in their effort to silence journalists.

[…] The controversy triggered by Hu’s piece took her by surprise, Hu admitted on her Weibo on Tuesday. Yet she reiterated her views in the comment section of her article on Caixin’s website.

“It’s true that only a trial should decide whether or not Chen is guilty, “ Hu wrote, “But the fact that he accepted bribes has been exposed, and we have to get to the bottom of it.” [Source]

Song Zhibiao, editorial writer for the Southern Metropolis Daily [which issued two supportive editorials before Chen’s confession was aired], also of Guangzhou, wrote on his blog that Hu is conforming with CCTV, which aired Chen’s jailhouse confession even before the police finish investigating.

“There are three themes in this case: Self-discipline, outside scrutiny and the law,” Song wrote. “Judging from the current situation of journalism, self-discipline can only be possible with independence, otherwise it’s ‘dictated self-discipline’.

[…] Sun Xuyang, a reporter from the same newspaper, also wrote on weibo, the country’s version of Twitter, that “self-discipline required by the government would mean difference voices were purged.”

Other journalists and media watchers have joined the debate. Peng Xiaoyun, a former commentator at Southern Metropolis Weekly, disagreed with her former colleagues. She wrote: “Are you really angry with Hu or the insecurity and fear brought by the decline of the industry?” [Source]

The truth is that compared to the taker of “mouth-sealing fees,” the state press is much more unscrupulous than the individual journalists on their payrolls. For instance, a few years ago CCTV revealed abuses by Baidu, the major Internet services company whose pay-per-click ad system led to fraud. Baidu search results helped send junk information designed to mislead the public. When this was exposed, many people predicted that Baidu would have to pay a fortune to silence CCTV from further reporting.

Sure enough, as Baidu’s chief financial officer, Jennifer Li, later confirmed, Baidu’s “marketing expenses” soared by more than 40 million yuan in the quarter following the scandal. The vast majority of these marketing-related expenses were given to CCTV.

[…] At the end of the day the biggest disgrace is that a large segment of the press in China has lost any sense of shame. This is a disgrace not only for the press but also for all of society. In today’s commercialized society, there is nothing that cannot be bought. Officials can be bribed, as can journalists and their employers. [Source]

As for solutions, both Hu Shuli and Zhan Jiang acknowledge that self-restraint within the industry will not be enough. Both argue that rule of law and legal recognition and protection of the media’s role are also necessary.

If Chen’s alleged misdeeds are commonplace among Chinese journalists, Caixin’s Zhang Boling and Yu Ning write, they are also consistent with the “ugly” rivalry between Zoomlion and its competitor Sany, seen as Chen’s most likely backer. Zhang and Yu chronicle a string of accusations of dirty tricks such as defamation by news report and text message, business espionage and even attempted kidnapping. At one point, Zoomlion accused Sany of defamatory accusations of defamation:

The Chen incident is certainly not the first time Zoomlion has claimed being victimized by the media. For example, the firm’s founder and chairman, Zhan Chunxin, said the company was defamed in a November 2012 article appearing in the Beijing-based magazine Global Entrepreneur.

Several Sany senior executives, including Chairman Liang Wengen, were interviewed for the story, which described how the company had been for years a target of business espionage, bribery and defamation. The story pinned some of the blame on Zoomlion. [Source]

“I don’t think this has anything to do with the trials at all,” said Carl Minzner, a professor at Fordham Law School in New York. “Rather, these are experiments with using public confessions on state television — completely independently of any legal proceedings — as a mechanism to send political warnings to the rest of Chinese society.”

[…] “To declare suspects guilty before court trials, CCTV has not only violated the professional code but also China’s existing law,” said Chen Lidan, a journalism professor at Renmin University in Beijing.

[…] “Such parading is clearly a violation of due process, and it shows how the party propaganda is prevailing over those who seek to promote the rule of law,” said political scientist Yang Dali of the University of Chicago. [Source]

]]>165110Calls for Journalist’s Release Gain Momentumhttp://chinadigitaltimes.net/2013/10/calls-journalists-release-gain-momentum/
Thu, 24 Oct 2013 07:26:02 +0000http://chinadigitaltimes.net/?p=164402At China Media Project, David Bandurski writes that Guangdong’s New Express repeated its front-page plea for the release of journalist Chen Yongzhou for a second day running. Chen was detained by Changsha police operating outside their jurisdiction last week after a series of his reports allegedly “damaged the business reputation” of Hunan-based construction machinery manufacturer Zoomlion. Bandurski adds that Chen’s detention has now attracted attention from other media outlets:

So far, plenty of other Chinese media have followed suit with this story. We are hearing that a strongly worded editorial from Guangzhou’s Southern Metropolis Daily was removed by propaganda authorities. The headline of that editorial apparently was: “Cross-Regional Detention Sends Chill Through Media; The Abuse of Police Powers Does Not Stand Before the Law.”

However, the Southern Metropolis Daily has managed to publish a second editorial on Page 02 today, and it has plenty to say.

The editorial argues that the Chen Yongzhou case is about a serious abuse of power by authorities in Changsha. “Even more unsettling,” the editorial says, “is if local authorities act only to serve local economic interests, if they ignore legal limitations and preventative regulations to pursue cases and arrest suspects, not only is this the ugly result of the failure to limit power, but it becomes a serious example of power doing evil.” [Source]

Comments by officials from the State General Administration of Press, Publication, Radio, Film and Television that it was “very concerned” for Chen came days after he was taken into criminal detention by police from Changsha, in Hunan following the publication in the New Express of articles he wrote alleging fraud at construction-equipment maker Zoomlion, based in Changsha.

“The administration would staunchly support normal media reporting and safeguard journalists’ legitimate and legal rights in conducting their reporting work,” the China Press and Publishing Journal cited an official as saying. “We are also against any abuse of press rights.” [Source]

]]>164402Lawyers Criticize “Straitjacket” for Online Rumorshttp://chinadigitaltimes.net/2013/09/lawyers-criticize-new-straitjacket-online-rumors/
Tue, 10 Sep 2013 23:02:57 +0000http://chinadigitaltimes.net/?p=162620China’s Supreme People’s Court and Supreme People’s Procuratorate issued a new judicial interpretation on Monday, sanctioning fines or prison time for those profiting from spreading rumors or deleting posts. Anyone deliberately posting lies, for profit or not, may face up to three years in prison if their posts are shared more than 500 times or viewed by more than 5,000 people. Xinhua explained the rationale for this “straitjacket” on online rumors:

As the Internet has grown into an easily accessible platform for the Chinese public, an increase in crimes such as defamation and blackmail has occurred online over the past few years.

[…] However, the top court’s spokesman, Sun Jungong, stressed that Internet users are still encouraged to expose corruption and other violations despite the new rules, adding that as long as web users are not fabricating information to slander others, they will not face criminal charges.

[…] The new rules are another means for authorities to ensure the healthy development of the Internet. [Source]

“This is going to last at least a few months,” he said. “The other Big V’s [influential microbloggers] will be targeted some way or another. Party leaders, he added, “worry that they have lost control of public opinion on the Chinese Internet. And this round they’ll be much harsher, and the targets will be the more influential people in the Chinese public sphere.”

[…] The attention of a Big V microblogger can transform an otherwise obscure incident — a land dispute in a village, a pollution spill in a river, graft by a small-town official — into a subject of passionate national discussion and a headache for the government. The tone of their commentary varies from earnest outrage to sarcasm to allusive irony; the last is intended to lull censors who prowl for offensive messages.

[…] But the explosion of Weibo has also fed a dank undergrowth of scams and fakery. Businesses use bogus “zombie” accounts to spread paid-for messages that give a boost to clients or discredit their rivals. Other operators make money by scrubbing messages that are damaging to businesses or politicians. “There is a lot of pay for play and dirty money going around,” [Sinocism’s Bill] Bishop said. [Source]

[… W]hat of the case in Shiyan, Hubei Province, where a man surnamed Xue was detained on August 29 for fabricating information and disturbing social order? In Xue’s case, his “rumor” had the basic facts of a car accident correct, but he said seven had died when in fact only three had perished.

[…] Wang Zhanyang, a professor with the Central Institute of Socialism, pointed out that the authorities have not yet clarified a precise definition of rumors, yet the campaign has evolved into a national movement. He said this has given rise to different approaches to enforcing the campaign by different local police departments.

“Life is filled with incorrect figures and it is hard to avoid them. Mistakes do not necessarily violate the law, let alone constitute a crime. Such serious punishments for tiny slips will only worry the public,” Wang said.

[…] “Local police may also have quotas to meet, which further muddles the situation,” Wang noted, adding that people must be extremely cautious when airing extreme opinions because they may end up having unintended consequences. [Source]

Lawyers criticized the new ruling as overly broad and an attempt to discourage government critics. “What’s the point in even discussing this?” wrote lawyer Liang Xianglu. “Law is not a root that will ever truly grow in this patch of earth. Instead it will always be a stick wielded by a bunch of thugs.”

[…] By expanding the scope of [provocation and incitement] to cover online activity, the new judicial interpretation “violates the principles of criminal law,” said Xu Xin, a law professor at the Beijing Institute of Technology.

Mr. Xu took particular exception to the expanded use of provocation and incitement, which he described as a “catchall” crime that is often abused by authorities. “The legal community has been calling for this crime to be eliminated for years,” he said. [Source]

Many critics reacted with sarcasm. “I really, really love the Communist Party,” Beijing-based lawyer Pu Zhiqiang wrote on his Sina Weibo microblog post on Monday night, along with a photo of him holding a bouquet of red roses. Dozens of people – among them several prominent lawyers – replied calling him a “rumour-monger”. “Can’t I slander myself?,” lawyer Pu retorted.

[…] Wang Cheng, a Zhejiang-based lawyer, argued in a post that the National People’s Congress decree granting the two judicial organs the right to issue such guidelines dating from 1981 was superseded by China’s 1982 constitution. They therefore lacked the authority to issue such legal interpretations, Wang wrote in a blogpost.

[…] The Guangdong-based Southern Metropolis Daily declared itself in opposition to the new guidelines in a terse Sina Weibo post. “How a country treats speech, especially not very accurate speech, is a benchmark of its constitutional rule. […] It is a must that this will not stifle criticism.” [Source]

]]>162620Ministry of Truth: Bad Trades and Fake Thirdshttp://chinadigitaltimes.net/2013/08/ministry-truth-bad-trades-fake-bribes/
Fri, 23 Aug 2013 22:43:03 +0000http://chinadigitaltimes.net/?p=161958The following censorship instructions, issued to the media by government authorities, have been leaked and distributed online. Chinese journalists and bloggers often refer to these instructions as “Directives from the Ministry of Truth.”

Guangdong Propaganda Department News Service Notice: (1) Regarding the incident of abnormal trading by Everbright Securities, the media are asked to report objectively in accordance with information issued by authoritative bodies. Do not hype. (2) Today’s “Zhang Tai” commercial advertisement in the Southern Metropolis Daily violates the stipulations of advertising law. The media are asked to strengthen revision of the contents of advertisements. Do not publish this type of advertisement. Do not report or comment on this incident. (August 20, 2013)

On the same day, Southern Metropolis Daily ran a cryptic full-page ad that lead to serious misunderstanding online:

Former Zhang Tai: Give it up! The winner and loser have already been decided. Only a man who does right by his woman is a good man! I hope you wake up soon. Take care of yourself. I wish for a world without thirds! Zhang Tai

前任张太： 你放手吧！ 输赢已定。 好男人，只属于懂得 搞好自己的女人！ 祝你早日醒悟。 搞好自己， 愿，天下无三！ 张太

Netizens quickly shared this ad on Weibo, shocked that a mistress would make such a public statement. “Former Zhang Tai” (前任张太) can also be read as “ex Mrs. Zhang”–readers assumed that a Mr. Zhang had left his first wife to marry his mistress. The wish for “a world without thirds” (天下无三) plays on the title of the film A World Without Thieves (天下无贼). Mistresses are known as “little thirds” (小三).

The paper issued an apology [zh] yesterday, explaining that the ad was actually the first in a series by the cosmetics company Hänhoo, which later reveals that the “former Zhang Tai” is the same fictional person as the current “Zhang Tai.”

CDT has collected the selections we translate here from a variety of sources and has checked them against official Chinese media reports to confirm their implementation.

Since directives are sometimes communicated orally to journalists and editors, who then leak them online, the wording published here may not be exact. The original publication date on CDT Chinese is noted after the directives; the date given may indicate when the directive was leaked, rather than when it was issued. CDT does its utmost to verify dates and wording, but also takes precautions to protect the source.

]]>161958Censorship Vault: “Kill Kill Kill” and Morehttp://chinadigitaltimes.net/2012/12/censorship-vault-kill-kill-kill-and-more/
Tue, 18 Dec 2012 15:35:30 +0000http://chinadigitaltimes.net/?p=148526In partnership with the China Copyright and Media blog, CDT is adding the “Beijing Internet Instructions” series to the Censorship Vault. These directives were originally published on Canyu.org (Participate) and date from 2005 to 2007. According to Canyu, the directives were issued by the Beijing Municipal Network Propaganda Management Office and the State Council Internet management departments and provided to to Canyu by insiders. China Copyright and Media has not verified the source.

All websites: Concerning the issue of unlawful construction in Qinglongtou Village, Fangshan District, there may be no reports.

2 March 2007, 17:10:17

All websites: Please appoint a special person to report situations daily during the “Two Sessions” period.

All websites: The national “Two Sessions” will convene tomorrow, during the period of the “Two Sessions,” all websites are requested to appoint a special person to report that day’s propaganda and reporting situation concerning the “Two Sessions” to the Network Management Office Network Management Section. Content reported by portal websites must include the number of articles (including pictures) issued between 12:00 the previous day and 12:00 of the day in question, the situation of content increase in the “Two Sessions” special subject, newly set-up columns, undertaken VIP interviews and titles, and audiovisual real-time report situations; websites other than portal websites may report all sorts of propaganda and reporting related to the content of the “Two Sessions” in integration with the specialties of that website. All websites are requested to report the above content before 14:00 of every day to Huang Jing at the Network Management Office Network Management Section (e-mail: huangjing@bjwgb.gov.cn, telephone: 671966780). All websites are requested to start reporting the situations starting from 12:00 this Sunday, when reporting matters, ensure that these are succinct and correct.

All websites: during the “Two Sessions” period, all websites are requested to appoint a special person to report that day’s propaganda and reporting situation concerning the “Two Sessions” to the Network Management Office Network Management Section. Content reported by portal websites must include the number of articles (including pictures) issued between 12:00 the previous day and 12:00 of the day in question, the situation of content increase in the “Two Sessions” special subject, newly set-up columns, undertaken VIP interviews and titles, and audiovisual real-time report situations; websites other than portal websites may report all sorts of propaganda and reporting related to the content of the “Two Sessions” in integration with the specialties of that website. All websites are requested to report the above content before 14:00 of every day to Huang Jing at the Network Management Office Network Management Section (e-mail: huangjing@bjwgb.gov.cn, telephone: 671966780). All websites are requested to start reporting the situations starting from 12:00 this Sunday, when reporting matters, ensure that these are succinct and correct.

5 March 2007, 13:59

I. (1) Please remove all column forms about the Two Sessions concerning “I have a question to ask the Premier, to ask the Foreign Minister, advice to offer,” etc., that directly create an interactive relationship with netizens to within the special subject on the Two Sessions, it is not permitted to directly put them on front pages and the important news section of news centers. (2) Netizens’ making statements shall first register and then make statements, anonymous statements are not permitted.

II. First Finance and Southern Metropolis Daily are non-standard copy sources, it is stressed again that from this day, they may not be reprinted, including that it is not permitted to reprint First Finance copy from International Online, Eastern Net and other focus news websites or Southern Metropolis Daily copy reprinted on Southern News Net of Southern Newspaper Net. If copy related to the national Two Sessions has been reprinted, please delete it.

III. All websites: Concerning the matter of the person who petitioned the Hebei Provincial Government, Ping Shuangxi’s “Journalist notification conference accusing the Hebei Public Security organs of persecuting petitioning masses,” no website may reprint this, interactive segments are not to disseminate or discuss this.

6 March 2007, 21:09

Concerning the matter of Chen Liangyu still being an NPC representative, do not open trackers without exception. Where they are open, please close them, thank you.

13 March 2007, 16:43

All websites: Please close trackers on images concerning “Tyranny on Chang’an Avenue During the Two Sessions Period” and corresponding information, push it to the back stage at the same time.

13 March 2007, 17:33

All websites: Foreign hostile forces disseminate “Son of a Bitch,” “Kill Kill Kill,” “Avenging the People,” and other harmful audiovisual information on foreign websites, all websites are requested to not reprint corresponding information, forums and blogs are not to reprint or discuss this.

The data concerning netizens’ questions to Premier Wen provided at Premier Wen’s press conference of this morning is corrected as follows: “Only on the Internet, more than 100,000 questions were asked to Premier Wen, the number of individual clicks exceeded 26 million.” All websites are requested to rapidly correct this.

]]>148526Word of the Week: Don’t Understand Actual Situationhttp://chinadigitaltimes.net/2012/10/word-of-the-week-dont-understand-the-actual-situation/
Wed, 24 Oct 2012 19:00:20 +0000http://chinadigitaltimes.net/?p=145202Editor’s Note: The CDT Grass-Mud Horse Lexicon is a glossary of terms created by Chinese netizens and frequently encountered in online political discussions. These are the words of China’s online “resistance discourse,” used to mock and subvert the official language around censorship and political correctness. The Word of the Week features Lexicon entries old, new and timely.

If you are interested in participating in this project by submitting and/or translating terms, please contact the CDT editors at CDT [at] chinadigitaltimes [dot] net.

Invented character combining the four characters in the phrase “don’t understand the actual situation.”

This stock phrase is often used by the government and official media to describe participants in “mass incidents” (群体事件 qúntǐ shìjiàn), such as riots and protests. It suggests that those who participate in mass incidents do so not because of any real grievances, but because they have been duped by a few schemers with “ulterior motives.”

Even state-run media have questioned this demeaning term. In July 2009, Xinhua ran an editorial suggesting that this phrase should not be the immediate explanation for all mass incidents. The Southern Metropolis Dailycommented in August of that year:

Whenever there is a mass incident, some government agencies will always issue statements to the effect that “people who didn’t understand the actual situation” were incited by “those with ulterior motives.” But this pretext is lifeless and unconvincing.

]]>145202Zhou Yongkang: Party and People Thank Youhttp://chinadigitaltimes.net/2012/06/zhou-yongkang-party-and-people-thank-you/
http://chinadigitaltimes.net/2012/06/zhou-yongkang-party-and-people-thank-you/#commentsWed, 13 Jun 2012 21:23:55 +0000http://chinadigitaltimes.net/?p=138097Despite calls for his ouster, it seems Zhou Yongkang won’t be leaving the Politburo Standing Committee anytime soon. He is believed to be a lone supporter of ousted Chongqing Party Secretary Bo Xilai. Rumors that Bo and Zhou were plotting a coup spread on Weibo in March; as apparent punishment, the central government forced Sina and Tencent Weibo to suspend the comment function for three days in late March.

Zhou was in charge of the “Clean the Web Campaign” (清网行动) to scour the Internet for criminal suspects between May and December 2011. He alluded to that campaign this April:

SouthernMetropolisDaily: Zhou Yongkang: Public Security Maintains Conformity with the Party center from Beginning to End: During an April 6 discussion of the “Clean the Web Campaign,” Zhou Yongkang expressed that public security is a blameless shield for the country. “The Party and the people thank you.” He stressed that “what the masses most abhor, we will attack; what the masses most loudly make known, we will tame.” In addition, public security must “maintain conformity with the Party center from beginning to end.” People’s Daily

When this screenshot was taken in April, the post on Southern Metropolis Daily’s Weibo account had been forwarded 2,179 times and commented on 1,254 times. As of June 13, there are 2,917 forwards, but only 11 comments. From the selection of comments below, it’s easy to see why so many disappeared. Still, a few telling remarks been left, such as this one from May 31:

TravelingDoctor: Supposing the masses most abhor the central government, what will Public Security do? “What the masses most abhor, we will attack” or “maintain conformity with the Party center from beginning to end?” Please respond!

云游郎中微博达人：假如群众对中央最痛恨时，公安是要做到“群众对什么最痛恨，我们就打击什么”，还是要“始终同中央保持高度一致”呢？请回答！

You can read more comments from CDT Chinese. Translated by Deng Bolun.

JadeMama: Recently, it seems like in every piece of news you see this sentence: Maintain conformity with the Party.

璇子的妈：最近好像在各种新闻上都能看到这句：跟党保持一致

HuaiRiverEastBarbarian: Do the Party and the people include me? I don’t have a f*cking vote, and I can’t open my own mouth. Like f*ck I’ve been represented by you.

淮水东夷：党和人民包括我吗？尼玛老子既没有选票，也发不出自己的声音，就特麽被你们代表了

xuyichao: You carry guns everyday. Do the masses dare say what they abhor?

Charlescc0574: Before there was one rumor after another. These days you are suddenly so animated. Is it that the more you try to hide, the more you expose?

Charlescc0574：之前传言纷纷，这些天马上就见你特别活跃，这不是欲盖弥彰吗？

HappyYilan: Is it the Party or the masses [that matter] after all? Don’t you think you’re contradicting yourself? Shouting a slogan, can’t you put a little effort into thinking about this?

快乐的依澜：倒底是党中央还是群众？不觉得自己自相茅盾吗？喊个口号你们都不能花心思想点

Lxion-Lixi: Attention all departments, attention all departments. Everyone please line up in order. Stand properly. There will be meat.

Lxion-李昕：各部门注意，各部门注意，请大家按秩序站队，站好队，将来有肉吃~~

SouthSeaGuest: Last month Chongqing’s municipal government said the same thing. Wasn’t it said in vain? Chinese society now—whether Chongqing’s government, the Ministry of Public Security or even the whole national system from top to bottom—must without a doubt maintain conformity with the central government. Need this be said? Once you’ve said it, won’t other people think you have ulterior motives?!

SeanAzureSky: The masses most abhor corrupt officials and public servants who misbehave. And we most abhor the police officers—they’re shadier than the mob. Take a look and do what you see fit.

SeanAzureSky：群众最痛恨贪官和公务员不作为，最痛恨比黑社会还黑的警务人员。你们看着办吧。

DunWeiqing: This is great material for textual analysis. Since that which represents the Party also represents the people, the thank “you” (Public Security) is immediately followed by maintaining conformity between the Party and that which represents “us” (Public Security). This is a power play: I am not only myself, I am also you. The identity transforms so quickly, it’s breathtaking.

Dear Representatives! Get up, go out and attend your meeting! Slap on your Dior cosmetics, put on your Chanel necklace, pick up your Hermes bag… Gourmet restaurants have prepared an array of fine dishes from different regions for you, from the deep sea to wildlife, from Fujian to Hainan, from France and from Germany… The roads have all been blockaded for you… After you eat, remember to go to the Great Hall to clap! Raise your hands! Clap! Raise your hands! Clap! Raise your hands! My dears, you can even sleep at the meeting!

Li Xiaolin, the CEO of China Power International Development Ltd., is the daughter of former premier Li Peng who is known as the “Butcher of Tiananmen” for his involvement with the military crackdown of 1989. She produced the now infamous quote: “I think we should open a morality file on all citizens to control everyone and give them a ‘sense of shame.'”

]]>http://chinadigitaltimes.net/2012/03/do-not-hype-two-sessions-gourmet-food-or-luxury-clothing/feed/1132955Ai Weiwei Released on Bail; Xu Zhiyong Reportedly Detainedhttp://chinadigitaltimes.net/2011/06/ai-weiwei-released-on-bail/
Wed, 22 Jun 2011 14:55:34 +0000http://chinadigitaltimes.net/?p=121897Xinhua reports that Ai Weiwei has been released on bail in recognition of his cooperative attitude and chronic illness:

The Beijing police department said Wednesday that Ai Weiwei has been released on bail because of his good attitude in confessing his crimes as well as a chronic disease he suffers from.

The decision comes also in consideration of the fact that Ai has repeatedly said he is willing to pay the taxes he evaded, police said.

The Beijing Fake Cultural Development Ltd., a company Ai controlled, was found to have evaded a huge amount of taxes and intentionally destroyed accounting documents, police said.

“I’m out, I’m back at home,” Mr Ai told The Daily Telegraph by phone, his voice notably softer than before his incarceration, “please understand, however, that I cannot accept interviews”. Asked how he was treated while in detention, Mr Ai again deferred to his bail conditions, but hinted that there were no imminent court proceedings against him. “I am out on bail for one year, that is all I can say,” he added.

Asked whether his bail would also prevent him using Twitter – a medium he used prolifically before his arrest – Mr Ai only managed a tired laugh, repeating apologetically that he was unable to speak further.

“Bail” is the shorthand commonly used as an English translation of the Chinese term “qubao houshen,” which means obtaining a guarantee pending trial [but see Siweiluozi’s proposed alternative translation, “obtaining a guarantee pending further investigation”]. It generally means that prosecutors have decided to drop charges against a suspect on certain conditions, including good behavior, and subject to monitoring during over a period of time during which charges could be reintroduced.

“This is a technique that the public security authorities sometimes use as a face-saving device to end controversial cases that are unwise or unnecessary for them to prosecute,” Jerome A. Cohen, a scholar of the Chinese legal system, said in an e-mail. “Often in such cases a compromise has been reached in negotiation with the suspect, as apparently it has been here.”

Mr. Cohen said Mr. Ai’s release “is very good news and perhaps the very best outcome that could have been expected in the circumstances of this difficult case ….”

Mr. Cohen said the circumstances of “qubao houshen” usually meant that the detainee had agreed to limitations on his or her behavior, and that the case could be quietly dropped if the detainee adheres to that agreement and other compromises made. Legally, the police can continue to pursue the case for up to one year. During that time, the suspect is allowed freedom of movement, but the police generally hold on to the person’s travel documents.

It is important to remember that, although the announcement claims Ai has “confessed his crimes”, no formal charge has ever been made against him; he was apparently not even formally arrested” (逮捕), not to mention indicted (起诉). Ai has thus not had to plead guilty to any crimes, although the term “renzui” (认罪), or admitting guilt, has been used in the press report. He can end the tax obligations by payment with interest, and perhaps a fine, as the press report says he is willing to do.

The decision to grant QBHS has little to do with the rule of law, but everything to do with the untramelled exercise of discretion enjoyed by Chinese authorities. This outcome makes clear that great international public pressure plus significant domestic and personal guanxi (关系, connections) can be a potent combination even in the case of someone who went further than anyone before him in openly thumbing his nose (and other body parts) at the Communist regime. Undoubtedly, Ai’s star talent, his family history and global support from the artistic community helped a lot.

“I think the timing is one of coincidence rather than a deliberate signal,” said Roderic Wye, a China analyst from the Chatham House thinktank. “In the post-Tiananmen days, there was the occasional high-profile person released, but usually before a US presidential visit rather than a trip to Europe, with all due respect to our leaders. The whole point for China is: we don’t give in to pressure these days, China is big enough to make its own decisions without taking foreign pressure into account.”

“His detention was political and his release is political. It is the result of a huge domestic and international outcry that forced the government to this resolution … I think Beijing realised how damaging it was to hold China’s most famous artist in detention,” he said.

“His release on bail can be seen as a tokenistic move by the government to deflect mounting criticism.” said Catherine Baber, Amnesty International’s Deputy Director for the Asia Pacific.

“It is vital that the international outcry over Ai Weiwei be extended to those activists still languishing in secret detention or charged with inciting subversion.”

Amnesty International is calling for the immediate release of Ai Weiwei’s four associates Wen Tao, Hu Mingfen, Liu Zhenggang and Zhang Jinsong, who all disappeared into secret detention after Ai was detained ….

“While Ai Weiwei’s release is an important step, he must now be granted his full liberty, and not be held in illegal house arrest as has been the pattern with so many others recently released from arbitrary detention.” said Catherine Baber.

Xu’s law firm was one of the few in China willing to represent the parents of the nearly 300,000 children sickened and the six who died last year as a result of dangerous milk additives.

Since its founding in 2003, the firm, also known as Gongmeng, has not shied away from sensitive topics. It challenged China’s secret detention centers, the so-called black jails, after a 27-year-old graphic designer who was arrested for failing to carry his identification card died in custody. Xu represented an editor of the hard-hitting newspaper Southern Metropolis Daily who was arrested in 2004 on what were widely seen as politically motivated bribery charges.

This summer, Xu’s firm joined the chorus of voices opposing a requirement that all computers sold in China come preinstalled with software that would filter out pornographic or controversial content.

But Xu is by no means a dissident, preferring to work within a system he has hoped to improve, not overthrow.